Pope's latest "initiative"

[BobRyan]

This interview was done by the Jesuit highest official magazine in Rome. The equivalent to that in America is the Jesuit magazine - "America". In this link they publish the full interview translated into English.

==============================================================================================================

http://www.americamagazine.org/pope-interview

I mention to Pope Francis that there are Christians who live in situations that are irregular for the church or in complex situations that represent open wounds. I mention the divorced and remarried, same-sex couples and other difficult situations. What kind of pastoral work can we do in these cases? What kinds of tools can we use?


“We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.




A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. “A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.
=============================================


He spins a simple question on morals "do you approve of homosexuality" - dealing with sin - not "Joe the homosexual" -- into the notion that to condemn sin is to declare that Joe is not a person or that Joe should not exist.



Where is he going with this nonsense?


Who is supposed to fall for that shell game?


Why is he even going down that road given that his church is not supposed to approve of that sin?

 

[targus]

The church is commissioned to proclaim the gospel - that is the message of Christ crucified.

To approach an individual by first condemning a particular sin is not preaching the gospel.

The sequence is preach the gospel, then instruct as to what is needed to respond to the gospel - namely the repentance of sin and the acceptance of Christ.

People do not repent of sin without first hearing the gospel.

I understand your stubborn confusion though in as much as your cult was founded on hatred of Catholics and love of a false prophet.

 

[BobRyan]

I was confused for the longest time as to why Baptist preachers were starting "community churches" and trying to avoid the name "Baptist" in the name of the church. When I asked them about it - they explained that there is a strong negative reaction to that name - as the denomination is shrinking. I still did not understand just why that is.

I thank Targus and one or two others here who have taken the time to carefully explain to me just where that strong negative reaction gets started.

well done!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Thinkingstuff]

This interview was done by the Jesuit highest official magazine in Rome. The equivalent to that in America is the Jesuit magazine - "America". In this link they publish the full interview translated into English.

==============================================================================================================

http://www.americamagazine.org/pope-interview

I mention to Pope Francis that there are Christians who live in situations that are irregular for the church or in complex situations that represent open wounds. I mention the divorced and remarried, same-sex couples and other difficult situations. What kind of pastoral work can we do in these cases? What kinds of tools can we use?


“We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.




A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. “A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.
=============================================


He spins a simple question on morals "do you approve of homosexuality" - dealing with sin - not "Joe the homosexual" -- into the notion that to condemn sin is to declare that Joe is not a person or that Joe should not exist.



Where is he going with this nonsense?


Who is supposed to fall for that shell game?


Why is he even going down that road given that his church is not supposed to approve of that sin?

Your speculation and claims of spin and incessant looking to accuse the Pope shows your heart. Don't forget the term Satan means accuser. In fact the Pope statement is clear and there is no spin and I agree with what he had to say. He made some good points Look at your quote.

We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.

These are the Points 1. As Catholics, as Christians, as the Church, we are to proclaim the Gospel "on every street corner. Amen to that. 2. And by our proclamation and preaching we are to show the good news of the kingdom and healing. Amen to that as well. 3. Healing for every disease and wound such as homosexuality. Amen to that! 4. Homosexuals only feel condemned by the church but in reality the church wants to express healing to them through the gospel. Amen to that! 5. And he explained what he meant as I've already shared with you here on this site what he meant on his flight from Rio which is once again. That he maintains what the Catechism teaches but he will not judge someone truly seeking God and healing from their homosexuality in good faith. Amen! If homosexuals can't find forgiveness and healing from their sin in the Church and through Christ, then where can they go? Nowhere. There is no spin to that. It is pretty clear. Homosexuals, like drug addicts, and adulterers can find healing and good news in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus frees them from those bonds of sin into a new life where they can be made whole. And to that I say Amen!
Look at the next thing you quote

A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.

He's making some more really good points here 1. The Catholic Church doesn't want to be pigeon holed in the public forum to just discussions about Homosexuality or abortion which seems to the case. It wants to direct the conversation to the good news and healing and renewal in Jesus Christ. 2. The Pope says he is a son of the Church meaning he upholds what has been taught. The church has already made clear its position on homosexuality and abortion. Nothing more needs to be said. 3. Our focus should be on evangelization of people who need Jesus Christ. 4. Therefore we consider the person who is wounded by their sin. Do you look at a homosexual in judgment? As a category of sin like a leper? Or do you see a man who needs Jesus Christ and healing? The Pope says we should focus on the later. Do you see a woman who had an abortion as a leper or as a woman who needs Jesus Christ and healing? Jesus Christ came to save sinners thus the sinner must be considered primarily. And I say Amen to that!

 

[steaver]

A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.

I think it is ok to reply with another question, however, why not answer the question and then explain the difference between God/Church condemning the sin as opposed to condemning the sinner?

I mean, of course God endorses the existence of the sinner with love, however, God will reject the sinner who does not receive Jesus Christ as Saviour, why doesn't this pope make this clear? This would have been preaching the gospel as the pope claims we should be. He is missing opportunities handed to him each day by giving Joel Olsteen, wishy washy answers, this doesn't help the sinner find eternal life.

Tell me, can you find a statement from this pope presenting the gospel of Jesus Christ (that would be the FULL gospel) to a reporter's questions? The gospel which convicts a sinner they are lost and in need of Jesus Christ? The gospel which declares any who reject Jesus Christ will not be saved?

 

[BobRyan]

If all he does is divert the point with another question - then in fact it is spinning rather than addressing the point. The question was simply asking about the sin itself "do you I approved of homosexuality"

But the Pope chooses to retell that incident - avoiding the question entirely as if the issue of "are you a real person" answers it.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

If all he does is divert the point with another question - then in fact it is spinning rather than addressing the point. The question was simply asking about the sin itself "do you I approved of homosexuality"

But the Pope chooses to retell that incident - avoiding the question entirely as if the issue of "are you a real person" answers it.

I agree:thumbsup:

Have you noted his effeminate nature?

 

[Sapper Woody]

With the way he speaks, it's hard to be clear of the Pope's intentions. They may be the purest, trying to not alienate homosexuals from the catholic church, and in not doing so win them over. However, if one were to place judgment on him, his statements could easily be construed as avoiding the hard questions or even standing in support of homosexuals.

 

[Yeshua1]

I think it is ok to reply with another question, however, why not answer the question and then explain the difference between God/Church condemning the sin as opposed to condemning the sinner?

I mean, of course God endorses the existence of the sinner with love, however, God will reject the sinner who does not receive Jesus Christ as Saviour, why doesn't this pope make this clear? This would have been preaching the gospel as the pope claims we should be. He is missing opportunities handed to him each day by giving Joel Olsteen, wishy washy answers, this doesn't help the sinner find eternal life.

Tell me, can you find a statement from this pope presenting the gospel of Jesus Christ (that would be the FULL gospel) to a reporter's questions? The gospel which convicts a sinner they are lost and in need of Jesus Christ? The gospel which declares any who reject Jesus Christ will not be saved?

How can the Pope do that, when the RCC proclaims and teaches a false Gospel though?

Think all of this just prelude to getting gay marriage/priests OK inthe RCC eventually!

 

[Revmitchell]

Why should anyone care what the pope says?

 

[Yeshua1]

Why should anyone care what the pope says?

baptists shouldn't, but the problem is that he is a big False prophet spewing forth bad truth to the world!

 

[steaver]

Think all of this just prelude to getting gay marriage/priests OK inthe RCC eventually!

Could they though, since the rcc believes they cannot be wrong about any decisions made by the popes of the past.

 

[Yeshua1]

Could they though, since the rcc believes they cannot be wrong about any decisions made by the popes of the past.

has any pope ever spoke in the "revelation mode" though concerning eithr gay priests/gay marriage though?

 

[Walter]

Could they though, since the rcc believes they cannot be wrong about any decisions made by the popes of the past.

For goodness sake. Plenty of popes have made wrong decisions in the past. Where in the world do you get the idea that popes are never wrong about anything? As far a papal infallibility by virtue of the promise of Jesus to Peter, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error "when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church".

 

[Baptist4life]

For goodness sake. Plenty of popes have made wrong decisions in the past. Where in the world do you get the idea that popes are never wrong about anything? As far a papal infallibility by virtue of the promise of Jesus to Peter, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error "when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church".

Walter, Walter..................is your last name Mitty, by any chance? :laugh:


In case you don't know who Walter Mitty is:

.....a man whose life is constantly interrupted by fantasies.

^^^^^ Sounds about right.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

We hear this from every charismatic pulpit every week across the globe, <proclaimed> ...

<<We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.>>

It's plain audacity. No more than meaningless words but meaningful innuendos. It is antichrist bragging and intimidating.

He nor all those 'churches' don't fool nobody.

It is Reformed Protestantism -- North America and Western Europe ‘on every street corner’ -- everybody is having a go at. They think we are the fools.

 

[Bro. James]

It is a sign of the times. The daughters are going back to their mother.

"The mystery of iniquity is already at work."

"We do not wrestle against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, spiritual wickedness in high places."

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

It is a sign of the times. The daughters are going back to their mother.

"The mystery of iniquity is already at work."

"We do not wrestle against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, spiritual wickedness in high places."

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

But isn't sin just reality James. Aren't we all just sinners? I have a very difficult time finding the purity without Jesus. Even he wasn't an idealist. Why do you call me good...none save God is good. Sounds like the remark of a sensible man.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

POSTMORTEM (for the RCC) Via Patrick J. Buchanan


Half a century on, the disaster is manifest. The robust and confident Church of 1958 no longer exists. Catholic colleges and universities remain Catholic in name only. Parochial schools and high schools are closing as rapidly as they opened in the 1950s. The numbers of nuns, priests and seminarians have fallen dramatically. Mass attendance is a third of what it was. From the former Speaker of the House to the Vice President, Catholic politicians openly support abortion on demand.

– Suicide of a Superpower

 

[BobRyan]

POSTMORTEM (for the RCC) Via Patrick J. Buchanan
... From the former Speaker of the House to the Vice President, Catholic politicians openly support abortion on demand.

Yeowwwza.

In any case - how is it that a Jesuit becomes Pope - after Pope Clement decreed that the Jesuit order was exterminated for all time in the 1700's?

Then having a Jesuit Pope - does it not mean that even more Catholic red lines will be crossed?

in Christ,

Bob